Organizaion of Nigerian Universities and Workers’ Productivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study investigated the organization and management of university system following the outcry among education stakeholders on the height of indiscipline among university workers. The population consisted of all teaching and administrative staff of all the tertiary institutions in the three geo-political zones of Nigerian federation: North-Central, Southeast, and Southwest. From these zones, a sample of two federal, two state and two private universities were randomly selected for the study. A stratified random sampling method was used to select 150 academic staff and 150 administrative staff from each government universities while 50 academic and 50 non-academics were selected from private universities. A total sample of 700 teaching staff (410 males and 290 females) and 700 administrative staff (362 males and 338 females) participated in the study. The data of the study were collected using the questionnaire titled Universities Organization and Workers’ Productivity (UOWP). The validity of the questionnaire was done by experts in Education Administration and Planning. The reliability of the instrument was tested using a Split-Half Method. The Correlation Coefficient was corrected by the use of Spearman Brown Formula. The Pearson Product Moment Correlation was .69 and final Spearman Brown Formula yielded 0.82. The statistics used were Z-test and percentage. The major finding was that the way the system is organized and managed has created indiscipline in the system. Based on the finding, the major recommendation was restructuring the system for better productivity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".